| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:07 pm Post subject: Can the Daily Show survive an Obama Administration? |
 |
|
Is the Daily Show dead?
| Quote: |
| ...in one eventful day, the prototypical Daily Show viewer has been transformed: Once disaffected and angry at Washington�s power structure, he�s now delighted and hopeful about the new president and all that he symbolizes. And if you�re an Obama fan � eager to give Barack the benefit of the doubt, and proud and excited about the change you�ve helped bring the nation � do you really want Jon Stewart sitting on the sidelines, taking potshots at your hero? |
If I have to judge from their live election episode, I'd have to say the funny is already on life-support. Jon Stewart, despite his pretentions to the contrary, is extremely partisan. I don't think he can really lay into Barack like he did the Bush administration. That's right, I don't think that much of Jon Stewart. I've seen him do serious, and he's crap at it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Paji eh Wong
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've said it before, I'll say it again. The Daily Show was better under Clinton. Stewart does political satire, not conservative satire. He only seems partisan because he is into the truth and lives in the wrong era.
The show might lose some fans who watch to see Bush kicked around, but I don't see it affecting the quality of the show. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khyber
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Compunction Junction
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I've seen him do serious, and he's crap at it. |
Some would argue his visit on crossfire was more than a little "not crap". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| I don't think that much of Jon Stewart. I've seen him do serious, and he's crap at it. |
Tom Shales was not very impressed by him, either.
Jon Stewart mocked W. Bush for eight years. Those who shared his politics defended it as "humor." But no matter what you call it, I do not see much more substance to him than this. And given his politics, I do not envision his mocking B. Obama for the next four to eight years. In any case, it does not matter to me where he goes from here. I never watched him or took my news information from him, either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Easter Clark
Joined: 18 Nov 2007
Location: Hiding from Yie Eun-woong
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think if they take their shots at the media and Fox News, everything will be fine. It would be a nice change of pace to see them poking fun at the way news is reported / what is deemed news-worthy instead of stoking the fires of anger toward the government. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| khyber wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I've seen him do serious, and he's crap at it. |
Some would argue his visit on crossfire was more than a little "not crap". |
Eh. It was little more than not crap. Olbermannesque tirades don't appeal to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Khyber: I just reviewed this nonsense. Jon Stewart does not offer anything in content or style that I cannot get from this messageboard re: American affairs and current events discussions, especially the self-righteousness and personal attacks. Such as this gem...
| Quote: |
CARLSON: Jon, Jon, Jon, I'm sorry. I think you're a good comedian. I think your lectures are boring.
STEWART: Yes.
CARLSON: Let me ask you a question on the news.
STEWART: How old are you?
CARLSON: Thirty-five.
STEWART: And you wear a bow tie... |
This counts as "not crap?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The media was always at least as much a target of the Daily Show as was the Bush administration. And plenty of jokes were had at Obama's and Clinton's expense during the primaries, and at Obama's during the main campaign. I doubt the show will stop being funny or duck poking fun at an Obama administration (and I would be disappointed if it did). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think he'll have the same fate as Rush Limbaugh when Bush got into office.
Meaning, he will defend Obama from Obama's critics. Someone needs to do it.
Even if he doesn't, I think as long as FOX NEWS is on the air, there will always be A LOT of material for the Daily Show. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Colbert Report will thrive! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paji eh Wong
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Paji eh Wong wrote: |
I've said it before, I'll say it again. The Daily Show was better under Clinton. Stewart does political satire, not conservative satire. He only seems partisan because he is into the truth and lives in the wrong era.
The show might lose some fans who watch to see Bush kicked around, but I don't see it affecting the quality of the show. |
Alas, Jon Stewart hosted the Daily Show for only the last year of the Clinton administration. Given the fuel he had for the election in 2000, I'd say we have no idea what he'll be like now that a Democrat is (soon to be) in the White House. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tiger Beer wrote: |
Meaning, he will defend Obama from Obama's critics. Someone needs to do it.
|
MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CNN, CBS all aren't doing a good enough job defending Obama so the Daily Show needs to jump in?
The Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard University's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy conducted a study of 5,374 media narratives and assertions about the presidential candidates from 2008 January 1 through 2008 March 9. The study found that Obama and Clinton received 69 percent and 67 percent favorable coverage, respectively, compared to only 43 percent favorable media coverage of McCain.[80] This trend widened following the presidential conventions, with an October 29 study of 43 news outlets finding 29 percent of stories about Obama to be negative, compared to 57 percent of stories about McCain being negative. This was most apparent on MSNBC, where 73 percent of McCain stories were negative compared to 14 percent for Obama.[81] Public perception of the media mirrored this trend, with an October 22 Pew Research Center poll finding that 70 percent of registered voters believed journalists wanted Barack Obama to win the election, as opposed to 9 percent for John McCain.[82] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There was an article in the NY Times quoting the stats you just mentioned pkang. Fox News was the exact opposite of MSNBC, and CNN was found to have nearly identical #s of positive and negative stories for McCain and Obama. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nevermind, I was wrong about CNN, and it was a different study. CNN was close to average for mainstream media.
Article
| Quote: |
Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism at the Pew Research Center, said, �To some extent, they are reverse images of each other.�
The group has studied the tone and content of the election-year coverage and found that Mr. McCain has been the subject of more negative reports in general than has Mr. Obama on issues that include assessments of their performances in polls, the debates and running their campaigns.
But within that universe, the study found, the share of positive reports on Mr. McCain at Fox News was above the average of the news media at large, and the share of negative reports about Mr. Obama was higher, too. (The study found that the mix of positive and negative was roughly equal for them on Fox.)
And the study found that MSNBC featured a higher percentage of negative reports about Mr. McCain than the rest of the news media and a higher share of positive reports about Mr. Obama. CNN was more generally in line with the average. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
